President Barack Obama stands with Vice President Joe Biden as he makes a statement about Syria in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington Aug. 31.

President Barack Obama said Saturday afternoon he will ask Congress for authorization to use military force against Syria. The White House released a declassified intelligence report earlier Friday that concludes with “high confidence” that the Assad regime fired chemical weapons Aug. 21 that killed at least 1,429 people. French President Francois Hollande said he is open to participating in a military strike, even as the prospects of British involvement dim amid domestic opposition.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has pleaded for restraint before UN inspectors in Syria, who left Saturday, analyze evidence from the site of the alleged attack, even as the White House stands by the allegations. The UN Security Council failed to agree Wednesday on a British draft resolution authorizing the use of military force amid opposition from Russia and China. Check here for TIME’s full coverage of the approaching strike.

Obama has a tough lift in the coming weeks convincing Congress—and the American people—to support his decision. He’ll have some allies to help him: Surely the American Israel Public Affairs Committee will help whip a vote, since having a failed state on the Israeli border isn’t appealing and the next looming red line is Iran. But that doesn’t make victory a sure bet.

Under the Constitution, the responsibility to declare war lies with Congress. We are glad the president is seeking authorization for any military action in Syria in response to serious, substantive questions being raised. In consultation with the president, we expect the House to consider a measure the week of September 9th. This provides the president time to make his case to Congress and the American people.

12:59 | President Barack Obama will not announce an imminent or ongoing military operation when he addresses the nation on the Syria crisis Saturday afternoon, a White House official said.

At 12:12 p.m. Saturday, Obama Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer tweeted that the president would address the nation at 1:15 p.m. on Syria. A White House official said Obama would use his remarks to update the American people on his decisions about how to proceed following last week’s chemical weapons attack, which killed over 1,400 people.

11:28 a.m. | CBS News White House Correspondent Major Garrett reports that the White House plans to hold a briefing with the Senate today, followed by a briefing with House Republicans and Democrats tomorrow.

Sources tell me the Sunday WH classified briefing on #Syria will be for ALL House members and in-person. Early afternoon.

11:10 p.m. | U.N. inspectors have left Damascus, MSNBC reports, possibly clearing the way for a U.S. military strike.

7:13 p.m. | Former U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told NBC News the United States can’t wait for the U.N. or its military allies to take action in Syria.

“When that line has been drawn and action needs to be taken, then the United States ultimately has to do that for the sake of the world and the sake of world peace,” said Panetta:

6:00 p.m. | U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told Security Council members that it may take two weeks until a final analysis of the samples recovered by inspectors in Syria is ready, according to diplomats cited by Reuters. U.N. inspectors will leave Syria Saturday.

5:55 p.m. | Human rights groups are divided over their support for a military strike on Syria, TIME’s Alex Rogers reports. Find his breakdown of the views of some of the leading groups here.

4:58 p.m. | One Venezuelan congressman is prepared to oppose a US strike—from the Syrian battlefieds, Girish Gupta reports for TIME. Adel el-Zabayar was in Syria visiting his ill mother but is now planning to fight alongside the Syrian army. Gupta writes:

With the upcoming threat of military attack by the US, he has decided to stick around and fight. “Without doubt, I’ll have a weapon,” he told TIME by telephone early on Friday morning local time from a site he said was around 50 miles south of Damascus near the city of Sweida. “I’m on the battlefield now.” Zabayar has no formal weapons training and is currently carrying out more administrative tasks on the battlefield, he says, alongside government fighters.

4:35 | U.S. Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who have previously supported U.S. intervention in Syria’s two-year long civil war, released a statement calling for an immediate strike on Syria’s “air power, ballistic missiles, command and control, and other significant military targets.” Here is the full statement:

Secretary Kerry made a passionate and compelling case that established the Assad’s regime use of chemical weapons on August 21st. The only remaining question is how to respond to an attack that was a crime against humanity, a violation of international law, and contrary to our interests and values as a nation. Unfortunately, it does not appear that the response to this historic atrocity being contemplated by the Obama Administration will be equal to the gravity of the crime itself and the U.S. national security interests at stake in Syria.

The purpose of military action in Syria should not be to help the President save face. It should not be merely cosmetic. Instead, the goal of military action should be to shift the balance of power on the battlefield against Assad and his forces. The United States, together with our friends and allies, should take out Assad’s air power, ballistic missiles, command and control, and other significant military targets, and we should dramatically increase our efforts to train and arm moderate Syrian opposition forces. This can be done in a limited way, without boots on the ground, and at minimal risk to our men and women in uniform.

We urge President Obama to delay no further in taking military action in Syria that could finally change the momentum of this awful and destructive conflict.

2:08 p.m. | Here is the full declassified U.S. intelligence assessment, released Friday.

Takeaways:

The U.S. government has “high confidence” the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack. That’s one assessment level short of “confirmation.”

The government says 1,429 people were killed in the attack, including at least 426 children.

Assad is the “ultimate decision maker for the chemical weapons program,” the report concludes, and the regime may have turned to chemical weapons in this case due to “frustration with its inability to secure large portions of Damascus.”

Chemical weapons personnel were preparing an attack for at least three days prior, according to U.S. intelligence. One report says a “Syrian regime element” used a gas mask in preparation for the attack.

The rockets were fired from regime-controlled areas, according to satellite reports.

1:46 p.m. | Here is the White House-released map of areas reportedly affected by the Aug. 21 chemical attacks. The government assessment, released Friday, says at least 1,429 Syrians were killed in the attack, including at least 426 children.

1:27 p.m. | Secretary of State John Kerry said in a speech Friday “we know” Assad used chemical weapons in the attack Aug. 21, revealing intelligence reports that rockets were fired from Assad-held territory into opposition-controlled or contested areas and that members of the Syrian regime were told to to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks.

“Our intelligence community has carefully reviewed and re-reviewed information regarding this attack. And I will tell you it has done so more than mindful of the Iraq experience. We will not repeat that moment,” Kerry said.

9:05 p.m. ET | The White House issued the following statement on its Syria briefing with Congress:

Following on the President’s calls with House and Senate leaders over the last day, and building on extensive Cabinet Member outreach to Congress over the past week, this evening Senior Administration Officials held an unclassified phone call with congressional leaders and the Chairs and Ranking Members of national security committees to brief them on the Administration’s thinking and seek their input on the U.S. response to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons near Damascus on August 21. The views of Congress are important to the President’s decision-making process, and we will continue to engage with Members as the President reaches a decision on the appropriate U.S. response to the Syrian government’s violation of international norms against the use of chemical weapons. Senior Administration Officials participating in tonight’s call included National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Secretary of State John Kerry, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Sandy Winnefeld. The call lasted 90 minutes and 15 Members asked questions of the assembled Administration Officials.

Administration officials are said to have used to call to detail evidence showing Syrian President Bashar Assad’s brother was involved in recent chemical weapons attacks, according to NBC News.

6:58 p.m. ET | A senior administration official told CBS News the U.S. intelligence community’s report on Syria’s chemical weapons use would be made public Friday. Showing that report to the public is one of the White House’s final prerequisites before launching a strike.

BREAKING. Sr administration official tells @MajorCBS intelligence report on purported Syrian chem weapons strike to be made public tomorrow

Even if the strikes go as planned, they could still alienate allies, unleash another flood of refugees on already overburdened neighbors, and put American credibility on the line just when it needs it most.

Read her full take on how military action could make things worse here.

A handout picture released by the Syrian Arab News Agencyon August 29, 2013 shows Syrian President Bashar al-Assad meeting with a Yemeni delegation of politicians in Damascus.

1:39 p.m. | Damascus civilians–even those that oppose Assad–are skeptical of the motives behind a potential U.S. strike, the New York Times reports. Ben Hubbard writes:

Many Syrians view the prospect of strikes though a lens of deep distrust of the United States’ motives. Even many who hate Mr. Assad loathe the United States for backing Israel. Also coloring views are bitter memories of the American-led invasion of neighboring Iraq in 2003 and the ensuing civil war that sent hundreds of thousands of refugees streaming into Syria.

Those legacies have left many in the opposition deeply reluctant to support American strikes…

Hubbard reports locals said U.S. involvement would exacerbate the violence and chaos:

“If the United States decides to hit, we are expecting more brutality and massacres from the regime all around Syria,” said Bassel Darwish, an activist in central Syria who said he had fled to the mountains. “We fear that the attacks might reach the headquarters of both the Free Army and government forces and the regime might fiercely attack the villages, killing more civilians.”

12:49 p.m. | “This is not where Obama wanted to be,” writes Michael Crowley in TIME’s cover story published today. Crowley writes that Obama’s next move will be a defining test of the president’s foreign policy vision.

From the start of his presidency, Obama sounded his call in speeches from Washington to Prague to Cairo, describing a transformed world order–“a revolutionary world” where “we can do improbable, sometimes impossible things…. But history, it has turned out, wasn’t interested.

11:19 a.m.|The International Red Cross says a military strike on Syria will worsen the humanitarian crisis there, making it even more difficult to deliver food and relief supplies. Magne Berth, head of the ICRC in Syria, told Reuters: “Further escalation will likely trigger more displacement and add to humanitarian needs, which are already immense.”

10:58 a.m. | British Prime Minister David Cameron called on members of parliament to support a strike on Syria in an emergency session Thursday, TIME’s Catherine Mayer reports. He said it is in Britain’s national interest to maintain “an international taboo against the use of chemical weapons on the battlefield.”

Cameron, who opened the debate, said regime change is not the goal and the government would not act before hearing from U.N. weapons inspectors.

8:01 a.m. | The British government has just released a statement on the legality of taking military action in Syria. According to the statement, “the legal basis for military action would be humanitarian intervention; the aim is to relieve humanitarian suffering by deterring or disrupting the further use of chemical weapons.”

6:48 a.m. | As the world waits for news on a possible strike on Syria, the Associated Press reports that scores of Israelis are preparing for potential fall out of a conflict. According the the AP: “Israeli police say thousands of Israelis are crowding gas-mask distribution facilities, readying for a potential conflict with Syria. Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said officers were deployed to maintain order in the northern city of Haifa, where more than 5,000 people jostled in line as they waited for their protective kits on Thursday. A sports arena there was being used as a distribution center to accommodate the crowds.”

6:10 a.m. | Despite President Obama’s declaration on Wednesday that the Syrian government was responsible for the chemical attack, sources have told the Associated Press that the intelligence on the weapons is not a “slam dunk.”

A report by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence outlining that evidence against Syria is thick with caveats. It builds a case that Assad’s forces are most likely responsible while outlining gaps in the U.S. intelligence picture. Relevant congressional committees were to be briefed on that evidence by teleconference call on Thursday, U.S. officials and congressional aides said.

The complicated intelligence picture raises questions about the White House’s full-steam-ahead approach to the Aug. 21 attack on a rebel-held Damascus suburb, with worries that the attack could be tied to al-Qaida-backed rebels later.

5:48 a.m. | Speaking from Vienna on Thursday morning, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pleaded with world leaders to delay acting before the inspection team — scheduled to leave Syria on Saturday — could complete its investigation. Reports the Associated Press: “He says all opinions should be heard before anyone makes decisions on how to react to the alleged attacks.”

5:36 a.m. | The Guardian reports that the UK’s deployment of six RAF Typhoon jets to Cyprus to protect British sovereign bases, announced by the Ministry of Defence early Thursday, is not in preparation of a strike on Syria. A spokesperson for the MoD told the Guardian: “This is purely a prudent and precautionary measure to ensure the protection of UK interests and the defence of our Sovereign Base Areas at a time of heightened tension in the wider region. This is a movement of defensive assets operating in an air-to-air role only. They are not deploying to take part in any military action against Syria.”

5:17 a.m. | Russia is sending two warships to the Mediterranean to head off possible military action against Syria, reports AFP and Reuters quoting Interfax news agency.

4:58 a.m. | The full text of the government motion on Syria to be debated in the U.K. Parliament on Thursday including opposition amendment can be seen via theGuardian. Extract:“This House believes that the United Nations security council must have the opportunity immediately to consider that briefing and that every effort should be made to secure a security council resolution backing military action before any such action is taken. Before any direct British involvement in such action a further vote of the House of Commons will take place.”

4:27 a.m. | Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird says his country may sit out possible military action against Syria, reports Anadolu. Baird said Canada is in agreement with its allies but the lack of military capabilities such as crude missiles in the region could preclude joining any operations.

4:04 a.m. | BBC suggest that the U.K. will bow to domestic pressure not to weigh into Syria conflict.

The BBC’s John Simpson says the US and France will go ahead with strikes on Syria early next week and the UK won’t. #r4today

3:11 a.m. | Iran’s state TV is reporting that President Hassan Rouhani has said Iran will apply all efforts to prevent military action against the Tehran-backed regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad, reports the Associated Press.

2:32 a.m. | Chinese state media has warned the West against strikes on Syria. In an editorial headed “No excuse for strikes,” the China Daily said on Thursday that the U.S. and its allies were “acting as judge, jury and executioner.”

1:05 a.m. | Fears of a possible U.S. strike against Syria’s regime over an alleged chemical weapons attack have rippled across the Middle East as about 6,000 Syrians flee to neighboring Lebanon in a 24-hour period and Israelis scramble for gas masks in case Damascus retaliates against them, reports the Associated Press.

8:58 p.m. | A White House official told TIME’s Zeke Miller the White House will brief Congressional leaders on Syria Thursday. The official also said the intelligence community’s classified assessment on Syria will be made available to Congress as soon as it’s finished. Unclassified details will be provided to the public this week, the official said.

This follows a report that members of congressional intelligence committees believe the White House has not been properly consulting them about its Syria plan.

7:00 p.m. | Domestic pressure has forced British Prime Minister David Cameron to delay his plans for a strike on Syria, Reuters reports. Cameron’s office is now saying the United Nations Security Council should be given time to see a report from U.N. chemical weapons inspectors in Syria before authorizing military action.

The Prime Minister previously put a draft resolution before the Security Council authorizing “necessary measures to protect civilians.” The council has met to discuss that resolution but has not voted upon it.

6:10 p.m. | President Barack Obama said he has “not made a decision” about a military strike in an interview with PBS NewsHour. But he said “we have concluded” that the Syrian government carried out the chemical attacks. Watch the full interview:

5:31 p.m. | House Speaker John Boehner called in an open letter for President Barak Obama to articulate the objectives and legal justifications behind a military strike. Boehner, who said the administration’s outreach has “not reached the level of substantive consultation,” refrained from passing judgment on a potential strike but listed a series of questions he said the president must answer first.

Boehner writes:

I respectfully request that you, as our country’s commander-in-chief, personally make the case to the American people and Congress for how potential military action will secure American national security interests, preserve America’s credibility, deter the future use of chemical weapons, and, critically, be a part of our broader policy and strategy. In addition, it is essential you address on what basis any use of force would be legally justified and how the justification comports with the exclusive authority of Congressional authorization under Article I of the Constitution.

5:01 p.m. | The British parliament may hold off on a final vote authorizing the country’s participation in an air strike until next week amid strong domestic opposition, potentially delaying any allied action till at least Tuesday, the Guardian reports.

4:42 p.m. | Even if the build-up to a potential strike on a Middle East country feels awfully familiar, TIMES’s congressional correspondent Jay Newton-Small says not to jump to conclusions. One reason:

Remember Freedom Fries? France and much of Europe weren’t wild about going to war in Iraq. France is now spearheading the effort to oust Assad, although Germany and southern Europe remain skeptical of military involvement. Britain, of course, was as much on board with Iraq in 2003 as it is with Syria in 2013.

A man, affected by what activists say is nerve gas, breathes through an oxygen mask in the Damascus suburbs of Jesreen, August 21.

4:07 p.m. | Preparing for an air strike, most of Assad’s forces have been evacuated from command headquarters in Damascus, Reuters reports. Civilians in the capital, meanwhile, are stocking up on supplies and cash and struggling to avoid what they consider potential targets in a city dotted with military installations.

“I’m starting to see the fear in people’s eyes,” one resident told Reuters by phone. “People have been in the habit of stocking extra food since the conflict began, but now people are buying huge amounts of food and water.”

3:57 p.m. | New York Times reporter Liam Stack shared on Twitter earlier today an event calendar from Syrian state media’s English-language service:

3:45 p.m. | Time World Editor Bobby Gosh explains Obama’s options now that an air strike is, as he says, “almost certain.”

3:24 p.m. | Syria’s ambassador to the UN told reporters that he called on the international organization to investigate alleged chemical attacks against Syriangovernment soldiers.

The Washington Post reports that the Syrian government has asked that UN inspectors remain beyond their Sunday deadline to look into the allegations that chemical weapons were used against Syrian government forces.

3:11 p.m. | Syria’s ambassador to the UN, Bashar Jaafari, told reporters his country is preparing for the “worst case scenario.”

2:21 p.m.

Bassam Khabieh / REUTERS

Free Syrian Army fighters escort a convoy of U.N. vehicles carrying a team of United Nations chemical weapons experts during their visit to one of the sites of an alleged chemical weapons attack in Damascus’ suburbs of Zamalka, August 28.

2:15 p.m. | Foreign Policy’s John Reed combined data from the Nuclear Threat Initiative on the location of Syrian chemical weapons with the site of Syrian air bases to create a map of potential targets:

1:56 p.m. | How will the strike unfold? Time’s Mark Thompson lays out his prediction of the military’s plan of action. He compares—and contrasts—the attack with Operation Desert Fox, the 1998 bombing campaign against suspected weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Thompson writes:

While both are rooted in weapons of mass destruction, the U.S. and its allies will not target them in Syria. Instead, they’ll go after the enablers — command posts, communications nodes, troops and delivery systems like missile launchers and artillery tubes — that Assad’s government needs to use them.

1:24 p.m. | The enemy of my enemy of my enemy is my…huh? Time’s Middle East Bureau Chief Aryn Baker points out that the U.S. would be joining forces, so to speak, with al-Qaeda-linked groups if it launches a strike in response to Assad’s use of chemical weapons:

“As an attack from Western countries seems imminent, so too does some kind of military response from the Islamist extremists… A Syrian affiliate of al-Qaeda has vowed to ignite a “volcano of revenge” against the Syrian regime, which it blames for the apparent chemical weapons attacks near Damascus. The statement was first reported and translated by the Jihadist threat monitoring network SITE Intelligence Group late Tuesday night.”

The next 72 hours will be
decisive in the career of the speaker of the House. The alternatives he faces
are these: John Boehner can, after “consultation,” give his blessing to Barack
Obama’s decision to launch a war on Syria, a nation that has neither
attacked nor threatened us. Or Boehner can instruct Obama that, under our
Constitution, in the absence of an attack on the United
States, Congress alone has the authority to decide
whether the United States
goes to war.

As speaker, he can call the
House back on Monday to debate, and decide, whether to authorize the war Obama
is about to start. In the absence of a Congressional vote for war, Boehner
should remind the president that U.S.
cruise missile strikes on Syria,
killing soldiers and civilians alike, would be the unconstitutional and
impeachable acts of a rogue president. Moreover, an attack on Syria would be
an act of stupidity. Why this rush to war? Why the hysteria? Why the panic?

Syria and Assad will still be there two
weeks from now or a month from now, and we will know far more then about what
happened last week. Understandably, Obama wants to get the egg off his face
from having foolishly drawn his “red line” against chemical weapons, and then
watching Syria,
allegedly, defy His Majesty. But saving Obama’s face does not justify plunging
his country into another Mideast war. Does
Obama realize what a fool history will make of him if he is stampeded into a
new war by propaganda that turns out to be yet another stew of ideological
zealotry and mendacity? As of today, we do not know exactly what gas was used
around Damascus,
how it was delivered, who authorized it and whether President Bashar Assad ever
issued such an order. Yet, one
Wall Street Journal columnist is already calling
on Obama to assassinate Assad along with his family. Do we really want back
into that game? When John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy explored the
assassination option with Fidel Castro, blowback came awfully swift in Dallas. Again, what is
the urgency of war now if we are certain we are right? What do we lose by
waiting for more solid evidence, and then presenting our case to the Security Council?
Kennedy did that in the Cuban missile crisis. U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson
made the case. And the world saw we were right. If, in the face of
incontrovertible proof, Russia
and China
veto sanctions, the world will see that. Then let John Kerry make his case to
Congress and convince that body to authorize war, if he can. But if Obama
cannot convince Congress, we cannot – and ought not – go to war. The last thing
America
needs is an unnecessary, unconstitutional war in that God-forsaken region that
both Congress and the country oppose. Indeed, the reports about this gas attack
on Syrian civilians have already begun to give off the distinct aroma of a
false-flag operation. Assad has offered U.N. inspectors secure access to where
gas was allegedly used. It is the rebels who seem not to want too deep or long
an investigation. Our leaders should ask themselves. If we are stampeded into
this war, whose interests are served? For it is certainly not Assad’s and
certainly not America’s.

Mr Obama, you are acting like a bully. There have been, during your tenure, several cases of attacks by another bully to a people that has been kept in a concentration camp for too long. Your response besides being cynical, has been a carbon copy of your predecessor. Not only, the other bully, the day before your representative was to have a meeting with the head of this bully country, this person gave the order to expand the construction of settlements in the occupying land going against the resolution of the UN and against International Law about the land taken in a war, but this bully slapped in your face, because is understood that you abide by the UN, in spite of your vetoes and the vetoes of your predecessor, about this subject. Now, mr Obama,where is your outrage about the dictator of N Korea, executing several people simply because he was displeased with them? Now, as to the Philosophy behind the supposed gas assassination using chemical weapons that has caused so much outrage in you. Where is the difference of killing 1300 with chemical weapons or using mass bombardment of cities killing thousands and thousands, men , women and children, in Iraq and in Viet Nam? Shock and awe don't bring any recollection, mr Obama? Where is the difference of those poor human beings being killed by gas or being pulverized by Napalm, Phosphorous and Powerful bombs? As a recipient of the Nobel Peace Price, you should know that in a war, useless as they are for the poor people involve in those dead but very useful for geopolitical reasons to the agressors or instigators of war, as in the case of Syria by your government, the wrong human beings are the only being sacrified in the Altar of the powerful and instigators, that afterwards shed crocodile tears when is convenient and not when it should be obligatory, whether the criminals are friends or foes. . Mr Obama, your history teaches you, don't poke at a wasp nest, you could be stung, or if you are in doubt, ask your noble predecessor who used lies and deceit to poke at the wasp nest.

It is so easy for the most powerful nation of the world to enter in a conflict where this nation has no jurisdiction and almost impossible to get out with its dignity intact.

Maybe, mr Obama, your action is going to be successful, but if is not you are going to be laughed at by the same immoral people that today are forcing you to take action, as mr Mac Cain and the Republicans at large and their filthy tail, the Tea Party, You'd better do the logical solution and stay out and try to manage and succeed in bringing the American economy where it should be in the world. On top.

I heard on a Non-Corporate owned news station today that Syria has been planning to build an Oil pipeline to Europe with Iran. Supposedly the West doesn't want this easy type delivery to the oil-hungry Europeans.

I strongly doubt any humanitarian concern on the part of our leaders since they know for a fact that our attack on the nations of Iraq and Afghanistan has led to the death of over a million people in that region and left millions homeless.

All the foreign parties involved in Syrian conflict have
their own vested interests - U.S., Russia, China, Iran, Western nations, Arab
League and Hezbollah.

It should be the Syrian people who should settle their own
differences, regardless of their belief, whether they are Sunni
Muslim, Shia Alawite, Christian or Druze, whatever their political affinity
is, they cannot deny the fact that they are all Syrians and only through
amicable settlement among themselves the issue could be resolved, not by any
foreign power but by themselves.

On May 30,2013 Adana district of
Turkey where Incirlik NATO base located , police arrested Al-Qaida linked Nusra
members fighting at the side of Syrian Opposition with 2 liters of Sarin as well
as ammunition and explosives , police initially confirmed this Colorless and
Odorless liquid as Sarin , but somehow later on local Government`s(called Vali)
office claimed it is `Antifreeze ` ? which should be “green in color” rather
than “clear” , as well as `other chemicals ` not identified the nature or
purpose ... So the bottom line is `These guys involved with Chemical Agents`
at the minimum and already confirmed ..Whether it is Sarin or other unknown
similar purpose chemical does NOT itself change the FACT that these guys
involved in Chemical Warfare Agent business ... Related Video and News at the
links belowhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zdvsKfDOVA

Easy way out: reveal that the Israel "intelligence" that's being used to justify this is fake. They've done this before.

Here's how they did it . . .

Victor Ostrovsky's book, "By Way of Deception," relates a case where the Israelis used a Trojan, a special communications device planted close to the origin of the transmissions to be faked. It allowed the Mossad to broadcast disinformation masquerading as the enemy's (Libyan, in this case) communications in order to deceive US and British listening stations.

Israel tricked Ronald Reagan into bombing Libya using fake radio messages. We may well be seeing a repeat with this lame story of an intercepted phone call.

READ ALBERT EINSTEIN AN AMERICAN GENUS WARNING OF THESE ATROCITIES HAPPENING ---WARNING ---- OF ZIONISM / NOT TO BE TRUSTED . SYRIA IS NOT THE ONLY ONE IN THIS REGION WHO HAS ROCKETS TO LAUNCH THESE ATTACKS .

Albert Einstein's 1948 Letter to the New York Times

If we want to understand the real history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, we can go to a trustworthy source: Albert Einstein, who was a great humanitarian and peace activist in addition to being one of the greatest scientists of all time. In his landmark letter to the New York Times in 1948, Einstein clearly and candidly explained why the leaders of Israel were not to be trusted and did not deserve money or support from Americans, including American Jews who believe in equality and democracy for all human beings. You can see a scanned image of the Einstein Letter by clicking the hyperlink. The letter was written by Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, Sidney Hook and more than 20 other prominent Jewish intellectuals, to alert Americans and the larger world to the dangers represented by the emergence of racism, fascism, terrorism and religious fanaticism among the Zionist leadership of the newly-formed state of Israel. The letter accurately predicted some of the terrible results we see today. I have annotated the letter with [bracketed comments] to help readers understand how the "Einstein Letter" relates to the present situation. — Michael R. Burch, an editor and publisher of Holocaust and Nakba poetry

Why not simply supply the rebels with CBW protective gear, antidotes, decontamination supplies and Internet-enabled detection devices, which would help pinpoint the location of any CW releases? One sure way to deter use of chemical weapons is to render them ineffective. The price of one cruise missile would buy a lot of gas masks. Assuming that deterrence is really the objective, of course.

Obama will call his muslim brotherhood and his brother in Kenya, talk to rev AL and Jessie, talk to Michele and his mother in law and then he will make up his mind. He can not call his son Trayvon anymore for thug advise .

"The U.N. Security Council failed to agree on a draft resolution ... "

"The main thing that endears the United Nations to member governments, and so enables it to survive, is its proven capacity to fail. You can safely appeal to the United Nations in the comfortable certainty that it will let you down."

We are told Obama intends
to hit Syria
with cruise missiles for just a few days to punish Assad and deter any future
use of gas, not to topple his regime. After a few hundred missiles and a
thousand dead Syrians, presumably, we call it off. Excuse me, but as Casey
Stengel said, “Can’t anybody here play this game?” Nations that start wars and
attack countries, as Gen. Tojo and Adm. Yamamoto can testify, do not get to
decide how wide the war gets, how long it goes on or how it ends. If the United States attacks Damascus
and Syria’s command and
control, under the rules of war Syria
would be within its rights to strike Washington,
the Pentagon and U.S. bases
all across the Middle East. Does Obama really
want to start a war, the extent and end of which he cannot see, that is likely
to escalate, as its promoters intend and have long plotted, into a U.S. war on Iran? Has the election in Iran of a new president anxious to do a deal
with America on Iran’s nuclear
program caused this panic in the War Party? If we think the markets reacted badly to a
potential U.S. strike on Syria, just
wait for that big one to start. Iran
has a population the size of Syria,
Afghanistan and Iraq combined,
and sits astride the Straits of Hormuz through which the free world’s oil
flows. And who will be our foremost fighting ally in Syria should we attack Assad’s
army? The Al-Nusra Front, an arm of al-Qaida and likely successor to power,
should Assad fall. Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

I think,
need to put a difference between the Israeli Jews and American Jews.

Barack
Hussein pushes the al-Qaida to Israel,
to see what would happen.

Who will
win the big question, but American Jews on the other side of the ocean is
already bet on. The opinion of ordinary Israelis are not taken into account, as
andthe opinion of ordinary
Americans.At whose expense this entire
Banquet? That is the question.

I love the clip on Youtube from "Taxi to the Dark Side", which featured a part of that speech claiming how Saddam was cooperating with Al-Qaeda, which the CIA got from an AQ operative to say after waterboarding him repeatedly.

You hit the nail right on the head - this has never been about deterrence, not since the first reports about possible us of chemical weapons started to filter out. The US does not really care about Syrian civilians, or civilians from any of the other countries that it got itself military involved in the past - Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq are the best examples.

Obama has not "pushed" al Qaeda in Syria -- I think events have overtaken American foreign policy there, as they have in Tunisia, Egypt and will continue to do.

This process began with the overthrow of the Shah --a serious fracture in the US' "order" in the region. The region, from the POV of American/western ability to exert control and dominance -- has never recovered.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar -- theoretically America's allies -- are newly out-of-control forces, and the ones pushing al Qaeda in Syria. There are plenty or reasons for anxiety in Washington, as the "unknowns" multiply. How stable is Jordan? What will the Syrian conflict do in and to Lebanon?

American Jews have grown increasingly nervous about and disenchanted by the right-wing types running israel. The israelis are right now scrambling to get gas masks -- a reminder of how precarious the quiet they've been enjoying for the past few years really is.

Israel is an American outpost, thrust into a region that rejects it and always will. The results would be the same if the place were solidly Methodist. When the place eventually goes down in the uncontrollable storm starting to break, the military/industrial types will shed a few crocodile tears, and move on.

For more than sixty years, the US has followed a neocolonial policy in the region. As the nation becomes less dependent on the region's oil, it will attempt to pull out, leaving a vast sea of wreckage behind. If I were running China, I'd be trying to figure out a way to keep America stuck.

@poliphobic@Openminded1 Nothing a bit of american humor it appears you can not take. You made a childish comment. And what is/ the overweight thing. You do not have fat people in the UK? have you ever been to California you will find the residents there in much better shape then in London. and our teeth are much whiter too. You have a jolly good day and do not forget to kiss the Queens ass. What a snob so typical. England should kiss the USA's ass you could be speaking german now.

@poliphobic@Openminded1 No just the the reverse only fine dining. But having visited London i found some very good restaurants, but nothing like Italy, france spain or in cities like Chicago,New York, or new Orleans and many more American cities. Face it England is not known for food.

We have many problems and deficiencies, mostly due to hopeless corrupt government and the EU, but I don't believe quality of food is one of them, unless you dine at fast food outlets (mostly American).